Arizona bill could criminalize Internet trolling

[Mr. Green]

Here's another stupid case.

Teen's profane tweet stirs free-speech debate. High school student get expell from high school due to profane tweet that's not school related. Clearly, this country allow censorship like any other country. Maybe its an isolated case but I see more and more of this ____. Heck, I hear cursing from student in college and even work place a number of times. Soon, they'll come up with similiar law. There is no physical threat what so ever.

https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46943248/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/#.T3tYmL_MDeM

I have to agree with KitFisto, to some degree, on this.

 

[thenammagazine]

Here's what I tell my employees. "Once you make your private life public, it's no longer private. So the 'it's my private life' holds no water." While this country has laws protecting the freedom of speech, it's also important to maintain consequences that hold one accountable for their actions, upto and including words that come out of their mouth/fingers.

Curious how many of you opposed to this were hating on Imus for the "nappy-headed kids" remark, or Limbaugh for the "**** whore" remark. Same deal there.

 

[KitFisto]

No I don't. I want a state that has laws available to prosecute people who threaten the lives of other people. Again, if someone posts something online that they are going to kill someone, I think that information should be admitted in a case.

We're going around in circles in this...neither of us is going to convince the other.

We went in circles because you will not recognise the law goes too far. As I said many times there is a difference between a threat to kill someone and pissing someone off because they don't agree with you and this law would make it illegal to piss someone off or annoy them. Why you can't understand that is beyond me.

 

[KitFisto]

Here's what I tell my employees. "Once you make your private life public, it's no longer private. So the 'it's my private life' holds no water." While this country has laws protecting the freedom of speech, it's also important to maintain consequences that hold one accountable for their actions, upto and including words that come out of their mouth/fingers.

Curious how many of you opposed to this were hating on Imus for the "nappy-headed kids" remark, or Limbaugh for the "**** whore" remark. Same deal there.

The worst part is that the people who hated on Rush had nothing to say about Bill Maur and his foul mouthed Dante about conservative women.

 

[pixletwin]

I sense a lawsuit brewing between Kit Fist and VASith.

 

[VASith]

I sense a lawsuit brewing between Kit Fist and VASith.

Not even close...we're having a civilized debate.

 

[karamazov80]

Initial gut reaction is about how stupid this is, but we aren't allowed to threaten people to their face without potential legal consequences. Should electronic posts be treated differently? If so, why?

But the thing about annoying or offending is stupid in my humble opinion, and really makes me question the real intention of this proposed legislation and ultimately, realize that it is stupid

 

[VASith]

We went in circles because you will not recognise the law goes too far. As I said many times there is a difference between a threat to kill someone and pissing someone off because they don't agree with you and this law would make it illegal to piss someone off or annoy them. Why you can't understand that is beyond me.

There is no lawyer or judge in this country that would ever bring or hear a case when it's over "annoying" someone. This bill is trying to protect people from others threatening their lives. Especially children. In AZ right now it's legal for me to email a kid and tell them I'm going to kill them tomorrow at school. It's covered under AZ's freedom of speech...this law would outlaw that. Why you have a problem with that is beyond me.

 

[sprig0701]

If trolling is a crime, then there are people on this forum who would receive the death penalty.

 

[thenammagazine]

There is no lawyer or judge in this country that would ever bring or hear a case when it's over "annoying" someone. This bill is trying to protect people from others threatening their lives. Especially children. In AZ right now it's legal for me to email a kid and tell them I'm going to kill them tomorrow at school. It's covered under AZ's freedom of speech...this law would outlaw that. Why you have a problem with that is beyond me.

There've already been criminal convictions for cyber bullying that lead to that Irish girl committing suicide. Didn't that set a legal precedence?

 

[VASith]

There've already been criminal convictions for cyber bullying that lead to that Irish girl committing suicide. Didn't that set a legal precedence?

From what I gathered, the AZ state law protecting freedom of speech trumps that.

This is an excerpt from an interview with the Bill's co-sponsor. Makes sense to me.

“This is simply updating an existing statute,” says St. Rep. Steve Farley of Tucson. He doesn’t understand the criticism.

Making threats or comments intended to annoy of offend someone over the phone has been illegal for years. Legislators just wanted to modernize the law.

“It can't be used to censor anything besides somebody who does threats. Like violent threats. And if you are telling someone how want to kill them online, maybe you shouldn't be doing that,” says Rep. Farley.

 

[VASith]

If trolling is a crime, then there are people on this forum who would receive the death penalty.

Would that be the "quiggle law?"

 

[sprig0701]

Would that be the "quiggle law?"

That's too much!

 

[thenammagazine]

From what I gathered, the AZ state law protecting freedom of speech trumps that.

Then maybe people should let it pass and file legal action against the politicians of the state for everything they find offensive that goes up via Twitter, Facebook, on their official websites, and just about every time McCain makes a press release. We had a similarly stupid bill for gun control in San Francisco, hastily pushed through by that idiot Feinstein, who, in all her genius didn't realize she didn't include an exemption for law enforcement and had to rescind the bill (though, quite hypocritically, her armed secret service guards were exempt).

 

[KitFisto]

There is no lawyer or judge in this country that would ever bring or hear a case when it's over "annoying" someone. This bill is trying to protect people from others threatening their lives. Especially children. In AZ right now it's legal for me to email a kid and tell them I'm going to kill them tomorrow at school. It's covered under AZ's freedom of speech...this law would outlaw that. Why you have a problem with that is beyond me.

Of course there will be a lawyer that will take a case like that and a court that will hear it. Again, a law against threats I'm fine with, but a law worded like this one? No way. Putting on the books is the first step. Enforcing it is next. Trust me, the more laws worded loosely the worse it is. A clear, defined law against direct threats is fine, but not stuff like this.

 

[Darth Cruel]

@VASith - I am curious as to why it is that you are completely glossing over the fact that citizens do not have the right to use the government as their personnal body guards at the expense of fellow taxpayers. The government is not intended to be the babysitter of the individuals.


If someone posts a death threat to my kid. I am all over it. And let's not even go to the place where just because someone who wants to kill my kid can't post the threat on the internet, they are not likely to change their minds about it.


Oh, and one other thing. Did you know that people who outwardly voice threats are actually less likely to carry them out? Those with true intentions of hurting other people usually do not give their intended victims advance warning.

But say that wasn't the case. Which of the following scenarios would you prfer?


Scenario 1 - Bully threatens victim on the internet one night and victim is able to alert proper interveners and the possibility of violence is deterred.


Scenario 2 - Bully finds out that it is illegal to post a threat so he decides to keep his intentions a secret and inflicts the violence on the victim without warning.

In the words of my opthemologist "Better 1, or better 2?"


At the very least, it gives me advance warning that I would prefer to have and will be less likely to get if this law passes.

 

[VASith]

@VASith - I am curious as to why it is that you are completely glossing over the fact that citizens do not have the right to use the government as their personnal body guards at the expense of fellow taxpayers. The government is not intended to be the babysitter of the individuals.


If someone posts a death threat to my kid. I am all over it. And let's not even go to the place where just because someone who wants to kill my kid can't post the threat on the internet, they are not likely to change their minds about it.

I'm not sure how this bill makes the govt your bodyguard.

Not everyone would take matters into their own hands. Wouldn't you want a law to protect your child? The other aspect of this bill is that it would give prosecutors more ammunition in a case where there was physical violence.

So are you opposed to any law that makes it illegal to threaten someone? Should it be legal to walk up to a woman, tell her you are going to rape her, then kill her? This is the same thing only it's being said digitally and not verbally.

 

[KitFisto]

Vasith, why do you keep addressing ONLY "threat to kill" as its the only thing the bill is about? If it was no one would have a problem with it.

 

[VASith]

Vasith, why do you keep addressing ONLY "threat to kill" as its the only thing the bill is about? If it was no one would have a problem with it.

Because the other parts are a joke and the bill's creator said they are going to pull those parts when they revisit it. People are freaking out about a bill that's going to be changed. In interviews they've stated it goes a bit too far, goes away from it's intended purpose.

 

[EnzoGorlomi]

f'n troll!